30x30: It's not just about the numbers

Earlier this year we provided a submission on a petition put forward by Our Seas Our Future, calling for Government to establish 30 percent of New Zealand’s ocean as Marine Reserves by 2030. Spoiler alert: 30 percent of New Zealand’s oceans are already designated as marine protected areas (MPAs). 

That’s right, using a range of protection levels recognised by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), 30 percent of our oceans are already designated as MPAs. Most of these have been implemented under the Fisheries Act to manage the adverse effects of fishing. There are serious consequences if commercial fishers are found fishing in these areas.  

So why was the petition raised? This comes down to the interpretation of the United Nation’s Convention on Biodiversity international targets, of which there are 23.  

The targets are comprehensive and holistic and acknowledge the needs of people as part of the ecosystem and the diversity in each nation’s natural resources, values, governance regimes and biodiversity priorities.  

The target relating to spatial protection of land and sea “30x30” is often interpreted as a zero extraction target. But that is not what’s intended. The target actually encourages a more diverse range of protection measures while allowing for sustainable use where appropriate. 

Which is exactly what’s happening in New Zealand’s oceans. This week, the Petitions Select Committee (which we made our submission to) reported back, and it was great to see that our position aligned with their conclusion.  

We enjoyed the entire submission process as it gave us the chance to share our position and clarify a few things that are often misunderstood when it comes to the global biodiversity targets. Because, as we mention above, it’s not just about the numbers. 

So, what is our position?   

We support an approach to marine protection that recognises and promotes the rights of indigenous people and local communities, is science- and objective-based, is effectively resourced and managed, and can demonstrate benefits to biodiversity. 

Let's look at some of that. 

Recognises and promotes rights of indigenous people and local communities  

We support the ICUN’s approach to marine protection that focuses particularly on inclusivity and rights, equity and effectiveness. In our case, we need to consider the customary rights guaranteed to Māori under Te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi (furthered through the Fisheries Settlement) and commercial fisheries rights granted under the Fisheries Act.   

Is science- and objective-based  

If you're a regular reader of The Update, you'll know our industry is a BIG fan of science. We use science to help inform our decisions and we are funding and encouraging science all the time. 

A couple of weeks back we mentioned in The Update that we’re helping to fund an additional two days of a baseline survey of the biodiversity of the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park. This is being carried out by NIWA and will help us to understand what’s happening on the seafloor. While it won’t give us all the answers, it will get us a step closer to ensuring that management measures in the Gulf are based on robust information and science.    

This approach needs to be applied to any MPA. If the science tells us that greater protection is needed and stopping fishing in that area will be effective, we can get behind it. But unfortunately, when it comes to MPAs, the science is often missing. The risk that gap creates is we don’t actually protect anything if we only seek to prohibit fishing and don’t address other risks such as climate change and pollution.   

When it comes to marine protection, the fishing industry is on board because sustainable fisheries rely on healthy and functioning marine ecosystems. It’s that simple.  

Many in our industry spend more than half their lives at sea, you couldn’t do this unless you loved it (check out Chase for example). And, like many New Zealanders, our fishers feel they have an intrinsic link to the moana and view themselves as kaitiaki of the marine environment.  

Don’t get us wrong, just because we have reached 30x30 in New Zealand doesn’t mean we can’t do more. As mentioned above, we believe more needs to be done to protect biodiversity from non-fishing effects, such as sedimentation, and we always want to make sure we’re fishing in the right place. We just need to gather the science before making uniformed decisions that impact many, while not effectively benefiting our oceans and all that live within them.  

If you want to dive into this more, we encourage you to read our full submission. We’re always happy to answer any questions you have. Because, when it comes to MPAs, it’s not just about the numbers.